apologies for the edgy URL I've no idea how to change it. Draft is on the second tab, while the first are spitballed concepts unrelated to this post. Would love to hear from the SCP vets here on how its looking and get some pointers on where it should go. Thanks in advance.

In addition, just gonna break down the concept of the skip quickly. A lot of this isn't in the article as it stands but it is where I intend to push the article towards.

In essence this skip is a building with antimemetic properties that increase with the knowledge of the anomalies true nature. At it's most extreme the document "erases you from existence" in the sense that you are impossible to perceive as real or a part of reality. It is hinted within the article that there are beings within the base causing the antimemetic effects but all draws to investigate are actually previous victims, who are unwittingly attempting propagating the anomalies effects.

UPDATE: full article is now present in the sandbox, including an Addendum section and exploration log. Very much unsure as to if i've added too much or not enough. I would appreciate an outside opinion on the changes.

Please don't reply to your own posts. If you have a major update and it's been several days since your initial post, such as your May 15th post, this is fine. But the May 12th post had information that should have been added to the first post. If you want to add information, you can edit your posts by clicking "Options" and then "Edit", in the bottom right corner of your post.

If the documentation on this SCP *is* memetic/infohazardous, then why would the Foundation keep such detailed information about it in the file? In order to ensure that the listening station is properly contained, at least some people will need to have access to some amount of documentation. I would have liked to see two versions of the file – one with all of the memetic/infohazardous material removed, providing only enough information as needed to secure containment, and one with the extended information.

I was also confused as to why the site director would be reading this. Given the dangerous nature of the uncensored file, I would have thought that someone so important would not have been allowed to be exposed to this. Indeed, the very fact that the note is written to the site direction is a bit odd – if the previous site director was affected, why would they not simply amnesticise themselves? Or is the implication somehow that the prior site director did indeed do so, and that when the new site director was appointed they had to read through these files?

There are a lot of plot inconsistencies. You have information that you want to convey to the reader, but it is currently done so in a way that reduces believability. I would have enjoyed it more if these plot holes were not there.

As for the actual idea, having people who are involved with a skip disappear from memory is one that has been done before, such as in SCP-3010. I would have liked to see something more than just this. It takes place in a Soviet listening station – perhaps they were experimenting and something went wrong? Or maybe they stumbled across something ancient and unknown during their excavations? Right now, the idea is a bit too bland for me to truly enjoy.

There are a number of spelling errors in this article; here are a few examples to get you started:

Safe, Thuamiel, Keter (previsionary), Safe, Maksur,(DATA EXPUNGED)

Dr ██████ began excavating within and around the structure, starting damaged radomes and descending into the central building.

One leads opposite the door used to enter the atrium, one directly oppose SCP-XXXX's primary entrance.

The constant strikeouts really break up the flow of the article. There are so many of them that I had trouble understanding what this actually did.
In addition, using strikeouts for three purposes (removing outdated information, implying that several subjects remain alive and can communicate through the documentation, and unilaterally removing information which directly contradicts prior documentation) further confuses the issue.

The formatting is a bit off – Item #, Object Class, Special Containment Procedures, Description, Addenda, and the names of people speaking in the exploration log should be in bold. I also recommend that you delete “Discovery” and just include the information in the Description.

There is some poor wording in this article; here are a few examples to get you started:

A three metre hectare area surrounding SCP-XXXX is to be patrolled regularly to prevent from access by any civilian presence.

The archaeologist and his team caught on to the(DATA EXPUNGED) became affected by SCP-XXXX and were pronounced as missing two weeks following their disappearance.

It appears (that) a multitude of items on the second floor were thrown from or pushed through the bannisters.

There are some missing spaces; here are a few examples to get you started (missing space is in between bold words):

Safe, Thuamiel, Keter (previsionary), Safe, Maksur,(DATA EXPUNGED)

All initiatives to explore SCP-XXXX physically are to be welcomed discouraged, unless directed by Site Overseer, On Site Researcher or D Class(DATA EXPUNGED) regardless of the initiator.

It is undetermined if SCP-XXXX’s effects are caused by a sentient entity or not, however all alterations to logs and Foundation documents often encourage further physical engagement with SCP-XXXX to find out what lies down there(DATA EXPUNGED).

There are some grammar mistakes in this article; here are a few to get you started:

Records on why this man-made hill was constructed appear to have been effected by the properties of SCP-XXXX, but it can be assumed this was a reaction to the heretical actions and compulsive human investigation (DATA EXPUNGED).

All recorded mapping, images or video taken inside SCP-XXXX is only partially affected by the structure's antimemetic properties and is “scrambled” on attempts at observation.

Alpha we're getting no solid reading from any of your cam's.

There are several instances of informal tone; here are a few to get you started:

It is undetermined if SCP-XXXX’s effects are caused by a sentient entity or not, however all alterations to logs and Foundation documents often encourage further physical engagement with SCP-XXXX to find out what lies down there(DATA EXPUNGED).

The archaeologist and his team caught on to the(DATA EXPUNGED) became affected by SCP-XXXX and were pronounced as missing two weeks following their disappearance.

There are several instances of missing punctuation; here are a few to get you started:

All rooms appear in a state of disrepair(.)

Boss(,) I got something here.

Command(,) you got anything on missing civvies filming around this area?

There are several instances of missing capitalisation; here are a few to get you started:

Thanks for the thorough response. I think I mostly agree with you in terms of the conceptual critique. I think you've misinterpreted the skip a tad, but that's probably my fault as an author. The idea behind the skip is less of the building itself has infohazardous properties, but more the items inside are the problem. The people who read the files don't disappear from memory as such, but cannot be perceived as having ever existed. They become their own antimeme. So they're still there and are calling for help, but all that accomplishes is exposing more people to the infohazards inside the building. I've removed the final document as I do agree with you that it introduces more plotholes than it alleviates.

Ah, on reflection I do understand what you were going for about it being the items rather than building itself. Even so, it feels like there should be some cause for all of the items becoming anomalous. Presumably they were non-anomalous while the listening post was being actively used? At what point did this occur?

I also understand that the squad are still there and calling for help, but again, there's a bit of a plot hole as to how they're managing to change the contents of the file, and who is redacting/expunging/striking out their pleas for help.

I think this needs something a little extra. It feels like there's a story lurking beneath it, but I can't quite grasp it, if that makes sense. I'd suggest focusing on making it's nature a bit clearer and filling in that plot hole. You could also focus on the history behind it, but right now I'd just like to see plot consistency.

Initial impressions: mountains of text. Seriously. Long paragraphs are intimidating to read. Breaking them up into smaller paragraphs will make them easier to read. I'll give you one example and leave the rest to you.

…minimise the spread of antimemetic effects.

A three metre hectacre area surrounding SCP-XXXX…

As a rule-of-thumb, I specifically recommend doing this such that each paragraph begins as you present a new category of information. Under "Description", the first paragraph could be the actual physical description, with each paragraph after that detailing the anomalies the object presents.

First, from your brief description of it, the thing feels more like it would be an infohazard, not an antimeme. Anything memetic involves the transfer of information. I don't really understand it myself, but I do know this: an infohazard has potentially harmful effects simply by knowing things about it, which seems more in line with what you're describing.

With that out of the way:

SCP-XXXX is to be directly explored to be monitored…

This seems kinda clunky. Did you mean for "to be directly explored" to be crossed out, as well? 'Cause that would fix the problem for me.

All instances of highly aggressive data corruption is to be entirely expunged…

Hate to be a grammar Nazi, but this doesn't follow subject/verb agreement. "All instances" is plural, so the sentence should read "are to be entirely expunged." Had the sentence instead begun "Every instance", then "is" would be the correct verb.

All initiatives to explore SCP-XXXX physically are to be welcomed discouraged…

I had some gripes about this, but a similar sentence bellow cleared it up for me. You'll know it when you see it.

…constructed in █████████ during the year 1973.

Since the month is redacted anyway, you may as well leave the mention of it out entirely. Just having "during the year 1973" or simply "in 1973" is enough, since that's basically all the information about when it was built anyway.

The station itself resides beneath a man made hill…

Further information on these disappearances post discovery is minimal…

All information on MTF Sigma 45’s further exploration is what you should be looking at considered top secret barring Level 4 clearance.

The phrases "man-made," "post-discovery," and "top-secret" should all be hyphenated.

…appear to have been effected by the properties of SCP-XXXX…

"Effected" should be "affected". Effect is usually a noun; Affect is a verb. When effect is used as a verb, it becomes a synonym for "cause". Long story short, you meant to say "affect" here.

As a result of this documentation of SCP-XXXX is possible up to a point, beyond this informational threshold the anomalies effects become dangerous.

Kind of a run-off sentence here. Making the comma a semicolon will instantly fix the problem.

…only partially affected by it’s antimemetic properties…

Get rid of the apostrophe. "It's" is not possessive; it is the contraction of "it is." Look, I swear I'm not trying to be a grammar Nazi! In any case, the Foundation would likely avoid saying "It's" in official documentation and instead expand it to "It is".

I have no problem with this. This actually made me laugh. I feel like this is one of the rare cases where an SCP article is allowed to be funny. By all means, keep it.

All information on MTF Sigma 45’s further exploration is what you should be looking at considered top secret barring Level 4 clearance.

Bringing up this sentence again because I'm not sure I like the phrase "considered top-secret." I think it works better as just "top-secret."

Last thing is about the concept. I like it, I like it a lot. The one thing it's missing is something hinting that, as you've described, "all draws to investigate are actually previous victims, who are unwittingly attempting [to propagate] the anomalies effects." It is specifically missing something that suggests the entities amending the documentation are past victims (that is what you were trying to say, right?), and without it, people would just assume that this is "simply a building what makes people disappear, how lame."

I would suggest putting exploration logs in the documentation, under a collapsible marked "Level 4 clearance required." You could explore and eventually reveal the idea there, hopefully in a subtle way that brings the whole thing home.

Sorry for being picky about grammar, but it's part of the SCP Foundation standard. People writing for this site generally want to be taken seriously. Quite frankly, proper grammar allows people to take you seriously. Bottom line, this is precisely what a first draft is for: catching bugs like this early so they don't stick around.

So I hope all of this helps. I would love to see this succeed and do well. So whatever you do, don't put it on the main site until you yourself are absolutely sure it's as good as you can make it. I haven't posted anything yet for that very reason Good luck!

Thanks so much for the critique! Don't worry about the grammar nazi thing it's just necessity. Either way really appreciate you looking through it all.

EDIT: to further clarify why it's antimemetic is that the people inside the building are unable to be perceived by those on the outside and depending upon how deep within they enter the structure more and more information is lost or distorted. The antimemetic effect gets stronger to the point of erasing the idea of an individual from perception based on how much you know/are exposed.

I do agree with you that needs to be more obvious though, simply struggling on how best to deliver that information.